| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 2184 2012 SLD 2184 2012 CLD 1 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 2495 of 2010, decision dated: 21st October, 2011.
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, J
Mian Manzoor Hussain for Petitioners. Rana Shamshad Khan, Assistant Advocate-General for the State. Muhammad Ahmad Pansota for
Respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
Writ Petition No. 2495 of 2010, decision dated: 21st October, 2011.
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, J
Mian Manzoor Hussain for Petitioners. Rana Shamshad Khan, Assistant Advocate-General for the State. Muhammad Ahmad Pansota for
Respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
SHAUKAT ALI and others
VS
THE STATE and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------S. 7(4)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 406---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Breach of trust---Quashing of F.I.R.---Petitioner obtained loan from complainant Bank and mortgaged assets and properties, besides hypothecation of stock---Complainant Bank on inspection of stock, noted deficiency therein and intimated the petitioner but their grievance was not properly redressed---Case under S. 406, Penal Code, 1860 was got registered against petitioner for mis-appropriation of hypothecated stock--- Petitioner's contention was that under S.7(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 the only remedy available to complainant Bank was to file complaint before Banking Court to decide the matter as there was embargo under the Ordinance to avail remedy under any ordinary law, either civil or of criminal nature---Validity---No order for quashing of F.I.R. could be passed in absence of any finding that the offences mentioned in F.I.R. were false and malicious and there was no finding that a particular forum or mode had been prescribed with respect to taking of cognizance of an offence which also implied prohibition regarding the registration of F.I.R.---Registration of F.I.R. and taking of cognizance of cases were two distinct and independent concepts under the criminal law---If the intention of law-maker was to put any clog on the registration of F.I.R. then the legislature would have said so specifically and if the law put a condition only on the taking of cognizance then it could never be read to imply prohibition on registration of F.I.R.---Petition was dismissed in circumstances. Murshid Ali and 4 others v. SHO, Police Station Saddar Khanewal and another 2011 PCr.LJ 1763; Nizar Ali Fazwani and another v. Messrs Pak Golf Leasing Company Limited and another 2009 PCr.LJ 325; Malik Tariq Mehmood v. Messrs Askari Leasing Ltd. 2009 CLD 1422; Muhammad Iqbal v. Station House Officer and 2 others 2009 CLD 1149 and Sabir Ahmed v. Nazeer Ahmed and another 2010 PCr.LJ 412 distinguished. Shaikh Muhammad Taqi v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 963; Ghulam…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492